Capo Spends Less Per Student, Earns Higher API Score

While the Capistrano Unified spent slightly less than the average California school district to educate each of its students last year—$7,246—it ranked among the best performing in the state in Academic Performance Index scores.

The juxtaposition at Capo highlights the crux of a report published Friday by California Watch, which found spending more money per student provides no assurance of academic success.

State lawmakers have struggled for decades to bring equality to how school districts are funded, yet some districts receive thousands more per student than others, the California Watch analysis has found.

More money, however, does not necessarily translate into better learning. California Watch’s analysis shows that there is no substantial correlation between how much a school district spends and its API, which is based on student test scores and other academic measures.

Last year, California schools spent an average of $8,452 to educate each student, a figure that includes money from local, state and federal sources, including onetime stimulus funds.

Capistrano Unified actually spent less than six other school districts with similar average daily attendance levels but beat them all with a high API score of 862.

Public schools consume the largest share of the state’s shrinking general fund—42 percent of the $86 billion total. How those funds are allocated is coming under increasing scrutiny by education leaders, advocacy groups, school districts and lawmakers.

In April, Assemblywoman Julia Brownley (D-Santa Monica), chairwoman of the Assembly Education Committee, introduced legislation to reform education financing. Based on a plan proposed by Gov. Jerry Brown during his gubernatorial campaign, the bill would simplify funding formulas and direct money to students with extra needs, such as those from low-income families.

“We talk a lot about the achievement gap, but there is also a parallel financial gap,” Brownley said. Unless the system is reformed, she said, “we will continue to have this disparity and this divide.”

As districts struggle to cope with massive budget cuts, an extra few hundred dollars per student can make a significant difference. In a school district such as Los Angeles Unified, by far the largest in the state, $500 more per student would yield about an extra $300 million, precisely the amount the district aimed to save when it sent out thousands of layoff notices this spring.

The disconnect between money and academic performance is at the heart of an ongoing debate among educators and researchers.

“Money may be necessary for school improvement, but it doesn’t guarantee that improvement takes place,” UC Berkeley education professor W. Norton Grubb in his recent book The Money Myth, concluded after conducting an intensive review on the subject.

In particular, he found that urban schools tended to spend inefficiently for a variety of reasons, including high staff and student turnover and conflicts over how to teach struggling students. At the same time, he said, urban districts often have extra expenses for needs such as security, dropout prevention, or for teaching students who are not proficient in English.

California Watch’s analysis is based on the state’s current expense of education per student, which includes annual salaries, employee benefits, books, supplies and other educational services. It doesn’t include costs for building purchases, construction, retiree benefits and food services.

Spending per student and API scores in districts with similar attendance as Capistrano Unified in 2010: